Monika Retno Wulandari, Erry Hidayanto, Vita Kusumasari

Critical thinking skills of junior high school students in solving geometry problems

Introduction

Critical thinking skills of junior high school students in solving geometry problems. Study junior high students' critical thinking in geometry problem-solving. Reveals challenges in analysis, evaluation, and inference, indicating generally low skills due to insufficient material mastery.

Abstract

This study aims to describe the critical thinking skills of junior high school (SMP) students in solving geometry problems. A descriptive qualitative approach was used, involving six eighth-grade students selected through purposive sampling. The subjects consisted of two students from each category of mathematical ability: high ( & ), medium ( & ), and low ( & ). The six students were selected based on their performance in the written test and their verbal communication skills, as observed during the pre-research phase, to ensure a more accurate representation of the population. Data were collected through written tests consisting of two essay questions and semi-structured interview guidelines developed based on Facione’s critical thinking indicators: interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference. The research data collected were written test results and interviews, which were then analyzed based on critical thinking indicators. The results showed that interpretation was the indicator most easily achieved by all subjects, analysis was optimally achieved only by students with high mathematical ability, while evaluation and inference were the most difficult indicators to fulfill. The study concludes that students’ critical thinking skills in solving geometry problems are generally low, primarily because of insufficient mastery of the underlying material.

Review

This study critically examines the critical thinking skills of junior high school students in the context of solving geometry problems, a highly relevant area given the increasing emphasis on higher-order thinking in mathematics education. The chosen descriptive qualitative approach, employing purposive sampling to select six eighth-grade students across varying mathematical abilities (high, medium, low), provides a suitable framework for an in-depth exploration of this complex cognitive process. A significant strength of the methodology is the grounding of data collection and analysis in Facione’s established critical thinking indicators—interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference—which lends theoretical rigor to the study and facilitates a structured assessment. The use of both written tests and semi-structured interviews further enhances the robustness of the data collection by triangulating findings and capturing both explicit reasoning and verbal thought processes. The findings offer valuable insights into the differential achievement of critical thinking components among students. It is particularly noteworthy that interpretation was the most accessible indicator for all subjects, while analysis was optimally performed only by high-ability students, and evaluation and inference proved challenging for most. This tiered performance across critical thinking skills, linked to mathematical ability, provides a nuanced understanding of student capabilities. However, the abstract could benefit from a clearer exposition of the specific identifiers for the students within each mathematical ability category (e.g., what the "(&)" represents). Additionally, while the selection aimed for an "accurate representation," it is important for qualitative studies with a small sample size to clarify that this refers to selecting information-rich cases for in-depth understanding, rather than statistical generalization to a larger population. The conclusion that generally low critical thinking skills stem from insufficient mastery of underlying material points to a crucial area for educational intervention. The study’s conclusion regarding the low critical thinking skills, primarily attributed to foundational material mastery, has significant implications for curriculum design and pedagogical practices in junior high mathematics. Educators should consider strategies that explicitly integrate the teaching of underlying geometric concepts with critical thinking exercises, perhaps focusing on scaffolding evaluation and inference skills. Future research could build upon these findings by developing and testing targeted interventions to improve these specific critical thinking indicators, potentially incorporating larger sample sizes or longitudinal designs to track development over time. Overall, this paper provides a solid foundation for understanding critical thinking challenges in geometry and offers clear directions for both pedagogical improvement and subsequent research.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.